Try this first.
Message 22146356
It appears to me that Muslims have claimed the right to dictate to western newspapers what they can and cannot print. Frankly, I would rather see war than give them that point.
Your source seems to have found a few obscure ancient exceptions to that rule from the art world that have been archived.
It certainly does appear that that rule against depiction of Mohammed has been violated, though, doesn't it? And with no consequences.
I noticed that in many, the face of Mohammad was hidden.
But not all.
"But it is the duty of the moderate Muslims to call them on it."
At the moment no one speaking in a rational tone can be heard above the saber rattling.
Maybe they'd better find a way. This could very well spin out of control. More and more of the west is coming to the opinion that the Muslim world cannot be dealt with on a reasonable and rational basis.
Gotta go and take wife to the doctor.
I understand what the Muslims are trying to accomplish here. Frankly, I'd say they have a point. Many, if not most, western versions of Christianity accept the Trinity. And at the the same time claim that those 3 gods are one. How 3 = 1 is a "mystery". Right. Yeah, I believe that. It is called denial and hypocrisy. Islam has been trying to avoid that denial and hypocrisy. Yet at the same time it did not decry depiction of its prophet that clearly violated the ban.
I also refuse to give Islam the right to dictate the content of the western press. Period.
The King of Saudi Arabia has his face on money
Correct. I just checked some riyals I had left from my trip to Saudi. Another contradition. It appears contradictions Islam approves of are fine and ones from the west are not.
They have exploited it to fuel their radical agendas. Foreign moderates are not speaking up against them because they are seeing an extremely unfair attack on Islam by Westerners, such as your self, also being attached to this issue.
I am not attacking Islam. I am atacking the right of Islam to dictate the contents of the western press.
"I'd say the objection is to burning embassies (which the host country has a duty under international law to protect), rioting against westerners, calls for economic boycotts, and killing westerners."
An example of tangential events that are being exploited by all sides.
Tangential? I think not. More like an act of war should the victim country decide to consider it such. |
